E
E.E.N.S
Guest
Uh yesterday? I think we were arguing out of miscommunication.And I agree with you.Now what were we arguing about?
(I edited post #411 by the way.
)
- Status
(I edited post #411 by the way.
)
M
mrs_abbott
Guest
Uh yesterday? I think we were arguing out of miscommunication.
I think so too. Now that I’ve had a good night’s sleep and I went back over and re-read the posts, I was scratching my head with this look :ehh: on my face. 
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
Blue Serenity:
Blue Serenity:
Blue Serenity:
Also, you say that the Church had it right until about A.D.800, yet here are some “facts” (listed on Wikipedia) about the Church of Christ that you will not find in the historical Church of A.D. 800 and before:
-Churches of Christ emphasize the use of only the New Testament to find doctrine, ecclesiastical structure, and moral beliefs, while maintaining that the Old Testament is also the inspired Word of God, is historically accurate, and that its principles remain true and beneficial (although its laws are not binding under the new covenant in Christ unless otherwise commanded in the New Testament).
-Churches of Christ in the United States are historically connected to the Restoration Movement championed by American preachers/theologians of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, most notably Thomas Campbell and his son Alexander Campbell, Walter Scott, and Barton W. Stone.
-Members of the Church of Christ point out that throughout church history many have sought a return to the simple original Christianity that is “pre-denominational” and unbound by the decisions of councils or denominational hierarchies. Rather than basing doctrine on the interpretations of post-first century church fathers, ecclesiastical councils, or more modern denominational synods or conventions, they use only the Bible as their source of doctrine. (Interesting though as the Canon of the Bible itself came from a council, lol
)
-They do not believe it necessary to trace an unbroken lineage back to the church of the first century in order to be the timeless and continual church that was established by Christ.
-Today, Churches of Christ have the following distinctive traits: the refusal to hold to any creeds other than the Bible itself (i.e., sola scriptura); the practice of repentance and believer’s baptism in Christ’s name as the response to receive remission of sins and the Holy Spirit; autonomous, non-denominational congregational church organization, with congregations overseen by a plurality of male elders; the weekly observance of communion/eucharist (i.e., the Lord’s Supper); and the practice by most congregations of a cappella worship singing (although several related congregations use instruments while keeping these other practices - also known as Christian Churches).
Not really united. Christianity of today all came from the Catholic Church for the most part, yes, but they are far from being united.
Blue Serenity:
How do you see us united in truth? Isn’t that why we are debating right now, because we are not united in truth?
Blue Serenity:
Indeed Christianity was at one point in time, now there are many splits from that historical Church.We were all Catholic, at one point in time or another.
Also, you say that the Church had it right until about A.D.800, yet here are some “facts” (listed on Wikipedia) about the Church of Christ that you will not find in the historical Church of A.D. 800 and before:
-Churches of Christ emphasize the use of only the New Testament to find doctrine, ecclesiastical structure, and moral beliefs, while maintaining that the Old Testament is also the inspired Word of God, is historically accurate, and that its principles remain true and beneficial (although its laws are not binding under the new covenant in Christ unless otherwise commanded in the New Testament).
-Churches of Christ in the United States are historically connected to the Restoration Movement championed by American preachers/theologians of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, most notably Thomas Campbell and his son Alexander Campbell, Walter Scott, and Barton W. Stone.
-Members of the Church of Christ point out that throughout church history many have sought a return to the simple original Christianity that is “pre-denominational” and unbound by the decisions of councils or denominational hierarchies. Rather than basing doctrine on the interpretations of post-first century church fathers, ecclesiastical councils, or more modern denominational synods or conventions, they use only the Bible as their source of doctrine. (Interesting though as the Canon of the Bible itself came from a council, lol
)-They do not believe it necessary to trace an unbroken lineage back to the church of the first century in order to be the timeless and continual church that was established by Christ.
-Today, Churches of Christ have the following distinctive traits: the refusal to hold to any creeds other than the Bible itself (i.e., sola scriptura); the practice of repentance and believer’s baptism in Christ’s name as the response to receive remission of sins and the Holy Spirit; autonomous, non-denominational congregational church organization, with congregations overseen by a plurality of male elders; the weekly observance of communion/eucharist (i.e., the Lord’s Supper); and the practice by most congregations of a cappella worship singing (although several related congregations use instruments while keeping these other practices - also known as Christian Churches).
B
Blue_Serenity
Guest
We are united in Jesus Christ. We believe in everything that is stated in the apostles creed.
E.E.N.S.:
It was a very tragic event that had to happen.
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
I was under the impression that the CoC didn’t adhere to any Creed.We are united in Jesus Christ. We believe in everything that is stated in the apostles creed.
Also, what about the part in the Creed where it says “We believe in One, Holy, Catholic and **Apostolic **Church…”
The CoC doesn’t have an unbroken line of Apostolic Succession.
B
Blue_Serenity
Guest
We always have but then again, we’re a VERY small congregation.I was under the impression that the CoC didn’t adhere to any Creed.
E.E.N.S.:
We say it as “catholic” (with a small c). See my response on the Who Has Authority thread in regards to us not having apostolic succession.
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
Blue Serenity:
Blue Serenity:
Then the quote from wikipedia is wrong? (Just curious.)
Blue Serenity:
I wasn’t talking about the “catholic” part, I bolded the Apostolic part. Again, wikipedia says that the CoC do not claim to be Apostolic.We say it as “catholic” (with a small c). See my response on the Who Has Authority thread in regards to us not having apostolic succession.
B
Blue_Serenity
Guest
It’s not part of our mission statement, if that’s what you mean. We claim to have links to apostolic succession, just different from what the CC recognizes.
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
Can you show me your Apostolic succession? (This was done from the time of the Apostles to current day by the laying on of hands, so you should be able to show it if you do have a valid line of succession.)
M
MrS
Guest
Hey E.E.N.S. watcha doin in me thread space.
I have asked Blue Serenity these questions already, and have tried to press for the answers… the questions:
*[1] Do or did your pastors/teachers EVER, at any time in the last 2000 years receive their authority to teach in His name from the Apostles? NO
[2] Do or did your pastors/teachers EVER, at any time in the last 2000 years have the power to forgive sins or confect the Eucharist? NO
[3] Do or did your church ALWAYS and still teach that divorce and remarriage is a adultry… contraception is a sin… and abortion at any time is murder?? NO
[4] Do or did your church (correctly termed a faith community) EVER profess the communion of saints, the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God, infant baptism, the existence of purgatory etc etc, NO
[5] Do or did your church EVER acknowledge the authority on earth of the Magisterium (teaching body) instituted by Chirst Himself, protected from teaching error in matters of faith and morals, and continiuing from Peter till the end of time? NO
so. … technically, you are not one who believes ALL that Jesus instructed orally (Tradition), and ALL of those teaching which became written to form the NT.
How is it that you can tell yourself that you are fully part of Christ’s intent that there be One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism???
2 words… you can’t
And yet you think we share the same history, up until the Reformation.
Nope… not up so or since the Reformation !!!*
and I usually just get the standard Protestant erroneous response like this one…
We are united in history and Truth. It’s up to you to either see that and accept the differences that exist today or not see it and continue to go round and round with this.
We were all Catholic, at one point in time or another
**
**
perhaps you will have better success…
**
**
.
B
Blue_Serenity
Guest
I have answered you and you refuse to accept my answers. I guess we’re done talking.Hey E.E.N.S. watcha doin in me thread space.
I have asked Blue Serenity these questions already, and have tried to press for the answers… the questions:
[1] Do or did your pastors/teachers EVER, at any time in the last 2000 years receive their authority to teach in His name from the Apostles? NO
[2] Do or did your pastors/teachers EVER, at any time in the last 2000 years have the power to forgive sins or confect the Eucharist? NO
[3] Do or did your church ALWAYS and still teach that divorce and remarriage is a adultry… contraception is a sin… and abortion at any time is murder?? NO
[4] Do or did your church (correctly termed a faith community) EVER profess the communion of saints, the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God, infant baptism, the existence of purgatory etc etc, NO
[5] Do or did your church EVER acknowledge the authority on earth of the Magisterium (teaching body) instituted by Chirst Himself, protected from teaching error in matters of faith and morals, and continiuing from Peter till the end of time? NO
so. … technically, you are not one who believes ALL that Jesus instructed orally (Tradition), and ALL of those teaching which became written to form the NT.
How is it that you can tell yourself that you are fully part of Christ’s intent that there be One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism???
2 words… you can’t
And yet you think we share the same history, up until the Reformation.
Nope… not up so or since the Reformation !!!
and I usually just get the standard Protestant erroneous response like this one…
We are united in history and Truth. It’s up to you to either see that and accept the differences that exist today or not see it and continue to go round and round with this.
We were all Catholic, at one point in time or another
**
**
perhaps you will have better success…
**
**
.
B
Blue_Serenity
Guest
Go to the Who Has Authority thread. I explained it there.
A
ALLFORHIM
Guest
Hi,
I asked a fellow Biblicist about Apostolic Succession and this was his answer: Part 1
Technically, a “Biblicist” is one who takes a literal approach to the Scriptures and believes them to be the written Word of God and, therefore, the ultimate, divine authority for the believer’s rule of faith and practice. It’s not a “religion” which one traces back to certain founders or leaders.
The true faith is not a religious faith, but a personal faith in what God has revealed through His Word concerning His Son and the divine redemption which comes through His sacrificial work on the cross. And this faith goes all the way back to Gen. 3:15 which, after the fall of mankind, God first spoke of and anticipated the “Seed of the woman,” a Redeemer who would come into the world. He being called the “Seed of the woman” alludes to His future, virgin birth.
God then chose the descendants of Seth as the line to bring in this Redeemer, preserved it through Noah, and after the flood chose Abraham, making a covenant with him stating that through him “all the families of the earth would be blessed” (Gen. 12:1-3). In other words, through him would come the promised Redeemer, the “Seed of the Woman” spoke of back in the Garden after the fall.
From Abraham’s descendants Isaac and Jacob, God formed a nation (Israel) through Jacob’s twelve sons who became the twelve tribes of Jacob. From those tribes He chose the tribe of Judah to be the kingly line, and within the tribe of Judah He chose one family, the family of David. And God made a covenant with David stating that one of his descendants would receive a throne and a kingdom, and that earthly throne and kingdom would endure forever before Him (see 2 Sam. 7:12-16; Ps. 89:20-37).
To a descendant of David God sent the angel Gabriel and told her (Mary) that she would bear a Son and “the Lord God would give Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end” (Lk. 1:32-33). Israel called this promised one the “Messiah,” “the anointed one.”
But Israel, as a nation, rejected their King/Messiah and the promised, Davidic Kingdom was postponed (it will be established on earth at the 2nd Advent of Christ). Instead of receiving a Kingdom, Israel’s King, by the Providence of God, became the world’s Redeemer through His sacrificial work on the cross. And instead of setting up His Kingdom on earth, the Son of God returned, bodily, to His Father’s throne in heaven there to function as the believer’s High Priest and Advocate before the Father. And starting with the “foundation” of His Apostles (Eph. 2:20-22) He is now, to this present day, building His Church (Matt. 16:18), calling it out from individual Jews and Gentiles in each generation who believe in Him for salvation. His Church being made up of every true believer baptized into the body of Christ through the Holy Spirit since Pentecost (Acts 1:5; 1 Cor. 12:13).
This is the faith of a Biblicist. A faith that traces its roots through the revealed, written Word of God, not through men. That rests in the promises of God, not the traditions of men. That focuses on the Person of Jesus Christ and His redemptive work on the cross on their behalf, not a religious institution headquartered in the city of Rome fueled by its sacerdotal/sacramental system.
Romanism teaches that the main reason the Son came into this world was to establish a Church, having appointed Peter its “head.” It then claims that Peter was the first “Pope” of the church of Rome and he appointed a “successor” after him, and his “successor” appointed another after him, and so on, down to this present “Pope.” Each being the “head of the Church” Jesus allegedly came to establish.
To be continued
I asked a fellow Biblicist about Apostolic Succession and this was his answer: Part 1
Technically, a “Biblicist” is one who takes a literal approach to the Scriptures and believes them to be the written Word of God and, therefore, the ultimate, divine authority for the believer’s rule of faith and practice. It’s not a “religion” which one traces back to certain founders or leaders.
The true faith is not a religious faith, but a personal faith in what God has revealed through His Word concerning His Son and the divine redemption which comes through His sacrificial work on the cross. And this faith goes all the way back to Gen. 3:15 which, after the fall of mankind, God first spoke of and anticipated the “Seed of the woman,” a Redeemer who would come into the world. He being called the “Seed of the woman” alludes to His future, virgin birth.
God then chose the descendants of Seth as the line to bring in this Redeemer, preserved it through Noah, and after the flood chose Abraham, making a covenant with him stating that through him “all the families of the earth would be blessed” (Gen. 12:1-3). In other words, through him would come the promised Redeemer, the “Seed of the Woman” spoke of back in the Garden after the fall.
From Abraham’s descendants Isaac and Jacob, God formed a nation (Israel) through Jacob’s twelve sons who became the twelve tribes of Jacob. From those tribes He chose the tribe of Judah to be the kingly line, and within the tribe of Judah He chose one family, the family of David. And God made a covenant with David stating that one of his descendants would receive a throne and a kingdom, and that earthly throne and kingdom would endure forever before Him (see 2 Sam. 7:12-16; Ps. 89:20-37).
To a descendant of David God sent the angel Gabriel and told her (Mary) that she would bear a Son and “the Lord God would give Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end” (Lk. 1:32-33). Israel called this promised one the “Messiah,” “the anointed one.”
But Israel, as a nation, rejected their King/Messiah and the promised, Davidic Kingdom was postponed (it will be established on earth at the 2nd Advent of Christ). Instead of receiving a Kingdom, Israel’s King, by the Providence of God, became the world’s Redeemer through His sacrificial work on the cross. And instead of setting up His Kingdom on earth, the Son of God returned, bodily, to His Father’s throne in heaven there to function as the believer’s High Priest and Advocate before the Father. And starting with the “foundation” of His Apostles (Eph. 2:20-22) He is now, to this present day, building His Church (Matt. 16:18), calling it out from individual Jews and Gentiles in each generation who believe in Him for salvation. His Church being made up of every true believer baptized into the body of Christ through the Holy Spirit since Pentecost (Acts 1:5; 1 Cor. 12:13).
This is the faith of a Biblicist. A faith that traces its roots through the revealed, written Word of God, not through men. That rests in the promises of God, not the traditions of men. That focuses on the Person of Jesus Christ and His redemptive work on the cross on their behalf, not a religious institution headquartered in the city of Rome fueled by its sacerdotal/sacramental system.
Romanism teaches that the main reason the Son came into this world was to establish a Church, having appointed Peter its “head.” It then claims that Peter was the first “Pope” of the church of Rome and he appointed a “successor” after him, and his “successor” appointed another after him, and so on, down to this present “Pope.” Each being the “head of the Church” Jesus allegedly came to establish.
To be continued
A
ALLFORHIM
Guest
Part 2
But the Word of God reveals that only ONE Man is, and ever was, Head of the Church, who is not an Apostle, nor a Bishop (Pope), or Patriarch, but Christ Himself:
Eph. 5:23 "For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself {being} the Savior of the body.
Col. 1:18 “He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.”
Rome’s boastful claim not only has great Scriptural problems but historical as well. Since there is no historical proof that Peter was even in Rome, much less functioned there as its “Bishop” for 25 years before his death. Tradition puts his death there, but that too is based only on tradition, having no historical documents that actually contain eyewitness testimony. And we do know that the church at Rome began with a board of elders governing it, not a single, authoritative Bishop (Pope/Patriarch). A type of Church government which was a much later development in both the East and the West.
Romanism is not a Biblically based faith, but a traditionally based religion. And its leadership would be the first to admit it. The Scriptures take a subordinate role to their traditions, and the interpretation of the Scriptures (as well as their traditions) are subject to its “Magesterium,” its teaching authority, which they, traditionally, predicate infallible.
Based on its works oriented salvation, Romanism cannot produce a saving faith amongst its devotees. It’s “faith” is focused on, and rests in, the church hierarchy itself (which Roman Catholics call their “mother”) and the authority it claims Christ gave to it to forgive sins and bestow (sacramentally) the so-called “graces” that will bring a “Catholic” to salvation and the hope of eternal life. No Roman Catholic believes, or is allowed to believe, he HAS eternal life now, contrary to Christ’s own words and the words of the Apostles. If any are saved within that institution they are saved not because of it, but in spite of it.
Man-made institutions are traced back to their founders, but “the faith” of a true believer, the faith of a true Biblicist, is not an institutional faith, but a living, abiding faith in the Word of God itself. A very ancient faith which existed long before that religious institution ever developed over in Rome during the Middle Ages.
The Anabaptists were a people who did not submit to the religious dictates of the Roman church but held to the “simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ” (2 Cor. 11:3-4).
I hope this helps
But the Word of God reveals that only ONE Man is, and ever was, Head of the Church, who is not an Apostle, nor a Bishop (Pope), or Patriarch, but Christ Himself:
Eph. 5:23 "For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself {being} the Savior of the body.
Col. 1:18 “He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.”
Rome’s boastful claim not only has great Scriptural problems but historical as well. Since there is no historical proof that Peter was even in Rome, much less functioned there as its “Bishop” for 25 years before his death. Tradition puts his death there, but that too is based only on tradition, having no historical documents that actually contain eyewitness testimony. And we do know that the church at Rome began with a board of elders governing it, not a single, authoritative Bishop (Pope/Patriarch). A type of Church government which was a much later development in both the East and the West.
Romanism is not a Biblically based faith, but a traditionally based religion. And its leadership would be the first to admit it. The Scriptures take a subordinate role to their traditions, and the interpretation of the Scriptures (as well as their traditions) are subject to its “Magesterium,” its teaching authority, which they, traditionally, predicate infallible.
Based on its works oriented salvation, Romanism cannot produce a saving faith amongst its devotees. It’s “faith” is focused on, and rests in, the church hierarchy itself (which Roman Catholics call their “mother”) and the authority it claims Christ gave to it to forgive sins and bestow (sacramentally) the so-called “graces” that will bring a “Catholic” to salvation and the hope of eternal life. No Roman Catholic believes, or is allowed to believe, he HAS eternal life now, contrary to Christ’s own words and the words of the Apostles. If any are saved within that institution they are saved not because of it, but in spite of it.
Man-made institutions are traced back to their founders, but “the faith” of a true believer, the faith of a true Biblicist, is not an institutional faith, but a living, abiding faith in the Word of God itself. A very ancient faith which existed long before that religious institution ever developed over in Rome during the Middle Ages.
The Anabaptists were a people who did not submit to the religious dictates of the Roman church but held to the “simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ” (2 Cor. 11:3-4).
I hope this helps
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
I am part of that thread - so your answer would effectually, “no”.Go to the Who Has Authority thread. I explained it there.
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
It shows two things:
- Whoever wrote that is severely lacking in both understanding and knowledge of Scripture, Tradtion and history.
- You yourself must not have read (or don’t remember) that these false claims have been answered MANY times on these fora. These claims presented are not true, nor are they even accurate.
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
M
MrS
Guest
That is totally not true… in fact it is a LIE
Jesus came as an appeasment to His Father for our sins… and He re-opened the gates of Heaven for all who would be saved
A
ALLFORHIM
Guest
Hi,
I certainly didnt expect you to believe any of this You wanted an answer of how we feel about apostolic succession and I gave you one:thumbsup:
Thats all.
I certainly didnt expect you to believe any of this
You wanted an answer of how we feel about apostolic succession and I gave you one:thumbsup:Thats all.
- Status